IN THE CASE OF:	   

		BOARD DATE:	  18 June 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140017957 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests award of the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM).

2.  The applicant states:

* he wants to know if he can get an AGCM now with a clean Army record and an honorable discharge
* he was not recommended for an AGCM
* he feels he deserves an AGCM

3.  The applicant provides no additional evidence.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice.  This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 24 March 1980 for a period of 4 years.  He completed his training and was awarded military occupational specialty 63B (light wheel vehicle/power generation mechanic).

3.  His records contain a memorandum from his battalion commander, dated 7 November 1983, who directed:

	a.  The request for removal of the bar to reenlistment against the applicant was approved and the bar was voided.

	b.  The Bar to Reenlistment Certificate would be removed and destroyed and the remark "not recommended for further service" on the applicant's DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record – Part II) would be lined through, dated, and initialed by the custodian of the applicant's personnel records.

4.  His records do not contain documentation relating to the circumstances surrounding imposition of the bar to reenlistment.

5.  Item 4 (Assignment Considerations) and item 27 (Remarks) of his 
DA Form 2-1 show the entries pertaining to further service and bar to reenlistment were lined through.  However, item 27 shows the entry "NFC GCMDL [not favorably considered for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal] (Barred 820507-831107)" was added.

6.  He was honorably released from active duty in the rank of specialist four on 23 March 1984 after completing 4 years of creditable active service with no lost time.

7.  His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) does not show the AGCM as an authorized award.

8.  There are no orders for the AGCM in the available records.  There is no evidence of any disciplinary action or a commander's disqualification that would have precluded him from being awarded the AGCM.

9.  Army Regulation 601-280 (Army Retention Program) prescribes the criteria for the Army Retention Program and outlines procedures for immediate reenlistment or extension of enlistment.  Chapter 8 (Bar to Reenlistment Procedures) states that when a recommendation for removal of a bar to reenlistment is approved, the remark "not recommended for further service" on the DA Form 2-1 will be deleted.  When a DA Form 2-1 is remade, deleted information will not be reentered on the new form.

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states the AGCM is awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by their conduct, efficiency, and fidelity.  This period is 3 years except in those cases when the period for the first award ends with the termination of a period of active Federal military service.  In instances of disqualification as determined by the unit commander, the commander will prepare a statement of the rationale for his or her decision.  This statement will include the period of disqualification and will be referred to the individual concerned for response.  The unit commander will consider the individual's statement.  If the commander's decision remains the same, the commander will forward his or her statement, the individual's statement, and his or her consideration for permanent filing in the individual's Official Military Personnel File.  The immediate commander's decision to award the AGCM will be based on his or her personal knowledge and of the individual's official records for the periods of service under previous commanders during the period for which the award is to be made.  However, there is no right or entitlement to the medal until the immediate commander has approved the award and the award has been announced in permanent orders.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence shows the applicant's bar to reenlistment was voided and his battalion commander directed its removal and destruction.

2.  Although item 27 of his DA Form 2-1 contains an entry stating he was not favorably considered for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal based on a bar to reenlistment from 7 May 1982 through 7 November 1983, the date the bar was removed, this entry is contrary to the battalion commander's orders.  On 7 November 1983, the battalion commander voided the bar to reenlistment imposed against the applicant and ordered its removal from the applicant's records and destruction.  He further directed the remark "not recommended for further service" on the applicant's DA Form 2-1 would be lined through, dated, and initialed by the custodian of the applicant's personnel records.  The battalion commander did not authorize an alternate entry.

3.  He was released from active duty in the rank of specialist four on 23 March 1984 with 4 years of creditable active service and no lost time.  There is no evidence of any disciplinary action or a commander's disqualification that would have precluded him from being awarded the AGCM.  It appears he met the eligibility criteria for the first award of the AGCM for the period 24 March 1980 through 23 March 1983 based on completion of 3 years of continuous enlisted active Federal military service.  Therefore, he should be awarded the AGCM (1st Award) and his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show this award.

BOARD VOTE:

___x____  ___x____  ___x____  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by:

	a.  awarding him the AGCM (1st Award) for the period 24 March 1980 through 23 March 1983 and

	b.  adding award of the AGCM (1st Award) to his DD Form 214.



      _____________x_____________
                  CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140017957



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140017957



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1